Charles under attack for supporting homoeopathy
The Prince’s backing for complementary medicine is ‘very worrying’ as it puts patients at risk, authors say
A 13-YEAR row between the Prince of Wales and a renowned professor was reignited yesterday with the launch of a book accusing the heir to the throne of putting patients at risk with his support for complementary medicine.
Emeritus Professor Edzard Ernst has previously labelled Prince Charles a “snake oil salesman”, and claims he was forced into retirement from the University of Exeter after a complaint from the Prince’s private secretary.
The Prince has been a vocal supporter of homoeopathy for decades, making impassioned speeches at the World Health Assembly and British Medical Association, and lobbying health ministers to set up a register of holistic practitioners.
But speaking before the publication of their book More Harm Than Good?, Prof Ernst and Dr Kevin Smith, of Abertay University in Dundee, said homoeopathic treatments were “immoral” and said that royal backing was “very worrying”.
Prof Ernst said: “You can’t have alternative medicine just because Prince Charles likes it, because that is not in the best interest of the patients. The quality of the research is not just bad, but dismal. It ignores harms. There is a whole shelf of rubbish being sold and that is simply unethical.”
Dr Smith added: “We certainly are very worried about the future king being a proponent. We should start to think of complementary and alternative medicines as a controversial industry, like tobacco, pornography and gambling. They are worthy of this badge of being morally tainted.” A Clarence House spokesman said: “It is not entirely surprising that a book entitled More Harm Than Good? takes a more critical view of complementary medicine than the Prince does.
“He believes that safe and effective complementary medicine is an essential part of any healthcare system as long as approaches are integrated with conventional treatments. Unfortunately the book misunderstands and misrepresents this position, which the Prince has reached after years of talking to experts in many different areas of medicine.”
The Prince and Prof Ernst have been at loggerheads since the professor of complementary medicine was asked to look at a draft report by Christopher Smallwood, the economist, which had been commissioned by the Prince to find out whether alternative therapies could save the NHS money. Mr Smallwood concluded that the health service could save up to £3.5billion, but before its publication Prof Ernst made a statement saying it was “outrageous and deeply flawed” and accused Prince Charles of “overstepping his constitutional role”. Sir Michael Peat, Prince Charles’s private secretary, complained to Exeter University, claiming Prof Ernst had committed a serious breach of confidentiality. Although cleared of any wrongdoing, he took early retirement. In his new book, Prof Ernst argues that alternative medicine runs the risk of “missing an illness that might even kill the patient”.